The Arrogance of Theism and Atheism

Originally posted by stellspalfie
so you are asking for evidence of something that isnt there? what a complete oxy[b]moron[/b]

unworthy of serious reply and i would simply like to point out, typical of the type of arrogant response that one is accustomed to when the proposer is bereft of reason. You were asked twice during this thread whether you have knowledge of the non existence of God, as yet, you have produced not a single iota and yet you hold the belief, which I have stated is fine, if you hold it as a personal belief, without knowledge, rationality or empirical evidence. It is double standards to expect the theist to produce evidence for his belief while you provide none for yours.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
again this is a logical fallacy, pointing out the deficiencies of theism is not providing any evidence for your own claims, that being, that God does not exist.

My contention is based on the comparative thinking processes not evidence. Let me put to you a simple question,is there a possibility ,however small ,that you might be wrong and there is no god?

Originally posted by OdBod
My contention is based on the comparative thinking processes not evidence. Let me put to you a simple question,is there a possibility ,however small ,that you might be wrong and there is no god?

Yes of course there is a possibility, I have acknowledged that already, but we are concerned, not with what is plausible, but what is true. So you have no evidence, that is fine, its an unsubstantiated personal belief and no more than that. Fine i can accept that.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
unworthy of serious reply and i would simply like to point out, typical of the type of arrogant response that one is accustomed to when the proposer is bereft of reason. You were asked twice during this thread whether you have knowledge of the none existence of God, as yet, you have produced not a single iota and yet you hold the belief, which I hav ...[text shortened]... ndards to expect the theist to produce evidence for his belief while you provide none for yours.

you can be as verbose and as demanding as you like, but it doesnt make what you are saying actually mean anything. hot-air.


Yesterday, upon the stair,
I met a man who wasn’t there
He wasn’t there again today
I wish, I wish he’d go away...

Originally posted by stellspalfie
you can be as verbose and as demanding as you like, but it doesnt make what you are saying actually mean anything. hot-air.


Yesterday, upon the stair,
I met a man who wasn’t there
He wasn’t there again today
I wish, I wish he’d go away...

when you cough up the evidence for your claim, let me know.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
ad hominem, attempting to substantiate your claims on the basis of an attack on the person proposing the argument.

Ad hominem?! 🙄

You admitted it on this very forum, I can dig out the verbatim quote if you'd like?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
again seeking to point out weaknesses in the case of theism is a logical fallacy, for it fails to provide any evidence for your own case.

Logical fallacy?! 🙄

I'm not discussing the entire spectrum of theism, I made a specific reference to the literal interpretation of the Bible God you believe in and made four points as to why the literal account is nonsense.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
when you cough up the evidence for your claim, let me know.

ill cough up the day you prove im not god.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Ad hominem?! 🙄

You admitted it on this very forum, I can dig out the verbatim quote if you'd like?

yes, using retrospective trolling, (that is digging up things persons have said in the past to embarrass them) is a logical fallacy and an irrelevancy, even if i did claim it myself, why? because once again, if fails to provide an iota of evidence for your own stance, which, seeing that you are in need of reminding, is that there is no God.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Logical fallacy?! 🙄

I'm not discussing the entire spectrum of theism, I made a specific reference to the literal interpretation of the Bible God you believe in and made four points as to why the literal account is nonsense.

whether you are discusiing the entire spectrum of theism or a few selected instances is irrelevant and a logical fallacy, for as the article points out, seeking to establish your arguments by negating those of someone else is not providing any evidence for the claims that you have made, those being that there is no God. We see it in politics all the time, a person is asked for a certain perspective on an issue and the recipient of the question ignores the issue entirely and launches into an argument on the deficiencies of some other party and fails even to address the issue at hand.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
ill cough up the day you prove im not god.

seeking to establish a basis for your claim on the inability of another to establish theirs is a logical fallacy.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes, using retrospective trolling, (that is digging up things persons have said in the past to embarrass them) is a logical fallacy and an irrelevancy, even if i did claim it myself, why? because once again, if fails to provide an iota of evidence for your own stance, which, seeing that you are in need of reminding, is that there is no God.

Retrospective trolling!!! LOL!!!!

Can you cite those books written by evolutionary biologists that you have read please?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Retrospective trolling!!! LOL!!!!

Can you cite those books written by evolutionary biologists that you have read please?

citing any books that i have read on evolutionary biology is irrelevant to the claim that there is no God, once again, its an ad hominem attack which seeks to justify a stance by attacking the personality of another. I am not making a claim that I have read any books on evolutionary biology, nor is it relevant.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
whether you are discusiing the entire spectrum of theism or a few selected instances is irrelevant and a logical fallacy, for as the article points out, seeking to establish your arguments by negating those of someone else is not providing any evidence for the claims that you have made, those being that there is no God. We see it in politics all the ...[text shortened]... into an argument on the deficiencies of some other party and fails to address the issue at hand.

Can you please read what I write and follow the thread accordingly. I'm making a specific claim with regard to the literal God of the Bible you believe exists. I'm not making a claim for every single definition of God that exists.

Again, I made specific reference to some key points with regard to a literal interpretation of the Bible creation story and why it is nonsense. I would provide links to books/articles/peer-reviewed papers for your good self to peruse over, but knowing your past history it would be a waste of my time.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
citing any books that i have read on evolutionary biology is irrelevant to the claim that there is no God, once again, its an ad hominem attack which seeks to justify a stance by attacking the personality of another. I am not making a claim that I have read any books on evolutionary biology, nor is it relevant.

It backs up my claim that you only see design because you wilfully refuse to educate yourself in the literature which explains how these processes occur by natural means.